linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] UART slave device bus

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Mon, 22 Aug 2016 23:54:14 +0100
From:   One Thousand Gnomes <gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To:     Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
Cc:     Marcel Holtmann <marcel@...tmann.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.com>,
        Sebastian Reichel <sre@...nel.org>,
        Peter Hurley <peter@...leysoftware.com>,
        NeilBrown <neil@...wn.name>,
        "Dr . H . Nikolaus Schaller" <hns@...delico.com>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        "open list:BLUETOOTH DRIVERS" <linux-bluetooth@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-serial@...r.kernel.org" <linux-serial@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] UART slave device bus

On Tue, 23 Aug 2016 00:00:17 +0200
Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz> wrote:

> On Mon 2016-08-22 22:32:23, One Thousand Gnomes wrote:
> > > why would we even have it create a /dev/ttyX for these devices in the first place. Lets just not create an uevent for it and lets not create a dev_t for it.  
> > 
> > Because if you don't it's a regression. It's not permissible to break
> > existing userspace.  
> 
> Well... it would be good to do the right thing, at least in the places
> where we can.
> 
> Yes, renumbering people's serials is bad, OTOH for new platforms it
> would be nice not to expose ttyS15 which can only return -EBUSY.

That would still be a regression. Not everyone even uses the kernel
bluetooth stack. It would only return EBUSY if you had done an "up" on it
via the direct bluetooth stack.

Alan